Just before Craig and I can lay down our keyboards and say “Our work here is done!” I have to draw your attention to the thing poor Andrew Marr has written on the Spectator.
In fact, I’m surprised Craig hasn’t mentioned it already because it’s been up since at least yesterday or was it the day before.. Remember this?
Of course you do!
But it seems that Andrew Marr has been traumatised by the outcry that erupted pretty soon after the marathon interruptathon hit the fan.
Who can blame him? Well, I may as well answer my own question. In fact, anyone/everyone who has a mind to can blame him, and accordingly, anyone has. Now poor Andrew has dug himself into a deeper hole than ever. He’s behaving like a Jeremy Corbyn. A limpet who won't let go despite a rejection on a scale that he and his cronies truly didn’t see coming (and can neither understand nor accept) who has just been smacked in the face by a wet Star of David symbol alongside the numbers “9 11”
Just as Jeremy Corbyn refuses to believe he might bear some responsibility for the rise in antisemitic incidents, Andrew Marr fears he might be blamed for contributing to the public’s loathing of the BBC. Well, don't worry, Andrew, if you believe you’re innocent, that’s all that matters. Just don’t look at the comments!
I think Craig has mentioned it! He posted about the Spectator article probably more than a week ago - and possibly more than once! lolReplyDelete
Yes but this is a new iteration. The comments are 'new'. It's either the same article, republished, or an updated version. I do remember reading it, (or one very like it) the first time round. However, the comments below this one are particularly lethal. ;-)Delete
Oh right...thanks for the tip!Delete
Watching this again, it was a grim performance by Marr, completely wrongly handled, with obvious bad temper. The propos he used are out of date, and the style is simply offensive. It wasnt a hard interview, simply an incoherently imcompetent one. He ruled himself out.ReplyDelete
Not sure fat shaming Boris was required either, I have no problem with the banter but if certain things are verboten for the BBC I don’t see why that shouldn’t be.ReplyDelete
Marr and the BBC generally hid the fact that Usman Khan had been plotting to kill Boris Johnson as part of his terrorist campaign, prior to being jailed. Surely it was relevant to mention when you reference Usman Khan in your introduction and then introduce Boris Johnson.ReplyDelete
Marr and the BBC hid this deliberately I think as they were fearful it might engender sympathy for Boris Johnson during the election campaign. As can be seen from Marr's introduction the emotion they wished to provoke was one of anger towards Boris Johnson, not sympathy. So the information had to be kept hidden, even though it was a matter of public record.